ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
楼主: Ysandre

[揽瓜阁逻辑小分队] day3

  [复制链接]
发表于 2022-9-22 23:27:02 | 显示全部楼层
看一下!               
发表于 2022-9-22 23:41:37 | 显示全部楼层
1.        水泥木头房子
The question said that there are two houses: cement水泥 and wood. Cement houses are likely to generate more cost savings in terms of cooling/heating compared to wood houses. Conducted experiment and confirmed. Argument says that cost savings will be more in real life compared to the experiment. Ask to strengthen.
P:实验证实水泥房子比木头房子更节约使用成本(在cooling和heating方面)
C:现实中会比实验中更节省
现实中的极端天气会比实验环境更糟糕;现实中还有很多实验条件下没考虑到的因素

2.        办信用卡防贼
学生之前往往用现金买饭,学校准备推出信用卡来防贼,这种信用卡会有学生的签名和头像,所以食堂里的员工可以辨认出学生来,减少贼。But this measure will not work, why?
信用卡有学生头像,食堂员工可以辨认
因此用信用卡代替现金买饭可以防止偷窃
买饭很忙,员工无暇顾及信用卡头像;学生钱被盗更多发生在寝室

3.        广告牌
Environmentalist say that 比较(不友好)的billboards and commercial signs will reduce the increase of tourism. So government should ban those billboards and signs. But two states – vemon and maine -- whose government banned the sign experienced a reduction in tourism growth. Explain why?
A: Did not consider effects from other signs
B: Did not consider factors other than the bans that may affect the tourism growth
B
发表于 2022-9-22 23:46:20 | 显示全部楼层
看一下!               
发表于 2022-9-23 00:18:26 | 显示全部楼层
1.strengthen:real life中随着时间推移,木头房子很容易产生建筑材料老化、漏气,以及容易燃烧等问题,当heating/cooling systems鼓掌的时候容易引起火灾增加成本;
2.贼可以伪造或者偷窃别人的信用卡假扮学生
3.b
发表于 2022-9-23 01:47:15 | 显示全部楼层
看一下!               
发表于 2022-9-23 02:32:31 | 显示全部楼层
Day 3

1.        水泥木头房子
The question said that there are two houses: cement水泥 and wood. Cement houses are likely to generate more cost savings in terms of cooling/heating compared to wood houses. Conducted experiment and confirmed. Argument says that cost savings will be more in real life compared to the experiment. Ask to strengthen.
P: C has more cost savings than W (cooling/heating)
C: More cost savings in real life
Strenthen: Found data or examples of other cost savings. e.g. C can last for much longer time than W. W will cost a lot on cleaning.

2.        办信用卡防贼
学生之前往往用现金买饭,学校准备推出信用卡来防贼,这种信用卡会有学生的签名和头像,所以食堂里的员工可以辨认出学生来,减少贼。But this measure will not work, why?
P: Workers can recognize the student by using a credit card with the student's signiture and photo on it.
C: Using that kind of card can achive the goal of decreasing thiefs.
Goal cannot achive:  Because the workers generally doesnot check the card that carefully. And thiefs steal not only cash but also credit cards.

3.        广告牌
Environmentalist say that 比较(不友好)的billboards and commercial signs will reduce the increase of tourism. So government should ban those billboards and signs. But two states – vemon and maine -- whose government banned the sign experienced a reduction in tourism growth. Explain why?
A: Did not consider effects from other signs
B: Did not consider factors other than the bans that may affect the tourism growth

P: Gov. should ban the signs and billboards which will reduce the tourism growth.
C: V and M banned the sign, but tourism decreased.
Reason: Other reason caused the reduction, such as the price increasing, the climate changed, another new and better place opend.



发表于 2022-9-23 17:16:34 | 显示全部楼层
Mark一下!               
发表于 2022-9-23 20:30:30 | 显示全部楼层
同意!               
发表于 2022-9-23 20:33:29 | 显示全部楼层
看一下!               
发表于 2022-9-23 20:36:18 | 显示全部楼层
Day 2
1.        柿子
考古学家在一个英国殖民地的一口枯井里发现了樱桃蓝莓和柿子的种子,而柿子(persimmon)不是这个英国的本土植物,但本地人好像喜欢吃柿子,因为发现柿子都是被留到快坏了才吃的,结论说土著教殖民者(英国人)吃本地不太熟悉的食物。问削弱
因为柿子都是被留到快坏了才吃,所以喜欢吃柿子。也许不是因为喜欢/不熟悉才留到最后吃,是因为它因。井里也有发现一种不可食的植物的种子

2.        假钞逻辑漏洞题
其一(find the flaw):政府为了打击假钞,准备发行新的纸币。然后新的纸币发行了之后,在市面上还是发现了新钞票的假钞。又过了几个月,政府宣布新纸币的发行成功让假钞团伙放弃了印假钞。问这个argument的错误在哪儿。
政府宣布新纸币的发行成功让假钞团伙放弃了印假钞—但是明明在市面上还是发现了新钞票的假钞
其二(assumption):假钞 但是是说旧货币造假严重,有了一个新科技来抑制。又说新的货币发行后,好像是先有很多假币,后几年就没再发现假币了。 所以推论这个新科技有作用。问有什么assumption。
新货币发行后,市面上发现的所有假钞都是旧货币,新货币从未发现造假。
3.        手套
描述一:是一种soon还是loon什么的专家认为会导致心血管疾病。因为他们做了个实验在一这个物质高的城市验证了这个说 然后给了好多选项, 问那个会 undermine这个
它因削弱,因为这个物质高的城市,另一种物质的含量高或者低
描述二:in places where there is a lot of pollution, people get cardiovascular diseases. And then they did an experiment, in which places with high pollution had higher rates and places with low pollution had smaller rates.  Therefore, places with higher pollution are more likely to get the disease. (undermine)
It is not due to the high-rate pollution, but other factors caused the higher rate of disease. / There are more sick ppl (already have diseases) who live in the high-rate pollution environment.
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-3-29 05:38
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部